HRC member of DLC doing what dirtier wing of the Dem party does

[thunder rising]

Normally I would not think of flaming a candidate, but the circumstances have changed. This is dirty politics and HRC is right in the middle of it. There are now three prongs and possibly four on the fork to shove HRC down America's throat. This is the same nasty tactics used against Dean in 2004, but this time it's bigger than normal because Obama and Edwards have sound financial bases. And, what you are seeing is the tawdry, cheap, underhanded politics that got the Democrats thrown out before. The DLC (and HRC) just will not learn.

First and second, the Florida and Michigan primaries where HRC is the only candidate to remain on the ticket. Imagine being the only candidate on a ticket that is going to be shoved on the Democratic party. In MI the Dem governor is out with others that they should vote for HRC, in Florida it's Bill Nelson leading the charge (he emailed me). In both states once HRC was the only candidate legal action was brought against against the Democratic Party itself. In FL it was by Bill Nelson (Sen: FL asshat). He assured a lot of people that he could ramrod this through and guarantee a Clinton victory.

Third is Nevada. Now that the Culinary Union backed Obama the DLC team through their proxies have gone to work. This action is having the Nevada State Education Association file suit to strip the at-large caucus sites. Now I would not give a shit except that it drags the good standing of classroom teachers into the mud with Hillary Clinton and the DLC. (If you are unionized teacher call your state and have them call national and have NEA shut down Nevada State Education Association suit.) Here's a warning, if teachers wish to get involved in undermining elections your pay and standing can go to hell.

The last, (this one is a stretch) since we have seen the extent that the DLC will go to manipulate a primary for their chosen candidate, it is now possible that the NH elections were indeed rigged.

Think on this when you talk about the "ethics" of HRC.

[aquart]

1. So Hillary is rigging elections now.

And when you are found to be wrong you'll apologize? Of course you will.

I'm pretty clear on the ethics of the Obama campaign now.

[thunder rising]

2. You can be clear on MY policy.

[Lucinda]

3. You seem to be suffering from a shortage of facts.

Hillary isn't the only one on either ballot.

And here is a link to the actual lawsuit filed so you can see what is happening in NV:
http://graphics.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/20080112_nevada_lawsuit.pdf

[UTUSN]

4. "The dirtier wing." Would be that be the one that wins elections?!1 & precious few. n/t

[mondo joe]

5. Our candidates are insulted for not being fighters, and then they're insulted for being fighters.

Hard to know what they're supposed to do.

[dailykoff]

6. They're supposed to fight fair and win, like Obama did in Iowa

and, it now appears, in NH. Dirty tricks are how the GOP wins, and Dems should NOT use them against other Dems.

[mondo joe]

7. What do you think FAIR means exactly in this context?

[dailykoff]

8. It means not rigging the machines and interfering with GOTV.

I think that's pretty obvious. It also means not filing lawsuits to prevent workers in Nevada from participating in their caucus.

[mondo joe]

9. I see. You think FAIR means you accusing a candidate of a crime without any

evidence to support your claim.

Nice.

[dailykoff]

10. Kucinich has requested a recount and the WAPO and NYT have

both published articles. I think those are pretty clear indications of malfeasance at this early stage.

[mondo joe]

11. None of that is evidence that Clinton did ANYTHING illegal or unfair. It's BS

for you to accuse her.

Furthermore, Clinton didn't file suit - the teacher's union did. And there is nothing unfair about filing a lawsuit - it's rather the point of such a suit: to establish what is fair.

[dailykoff]

12. In my mind it is, and I'm greatly relieved that it is in others too.

This shit has got to stop no matter who's doing it.

[mondo joe]

13. Yeah. Nice John Kerry avatar. If he had Hillary's balls he might be President now.

So no wonder you are appalled at anything other than the most wimpy campaign.

[dailykoff]

14. Good grief.

I thought you liked her.

[mondo joe]

15. "Liked her"?

I think Hillary and Obama are roughly equivalent, and the only likely Dem contenders.

I like that Hillary is a smart and tough fighter.

I don't like or dislike her. She's not my friend - she's a nominee.

And - again - if John Kerry was as good as she is he'd be president now instead of basking in his wimpy loss.

[dailykoff]

16. Cheating isn't winning

and if that's the only way she can pull it off she shouldn't be in the race.

[dkf]

18. Agree. She only goes down and dirty because she knows she can't win it fair and square.

Awful.

[dailykoff]

19. Exactly. She's a weak candidate in a strong field.

Her senate record is shameful, she has high negatives with both Dem and GOP voters, she's a lousy debater and the only thing keeping her wretched campaign alive at this point is good ol' Dixie vote stealing.

[mondo joe]

20. And accusing someone of cheating because you don't like them doesn't make them cheaters.

:-)

[wildflowergardener]

17. Kerry

Oh - come on - does every thread on here have to have an anti Kerry post?

Meg